GroundedWisdom wrote: » The implications are that it is a form of Gambling, and it is not. Both legally and literally. What they're doing is creating a precedence by forcing the Apps they provide into a corner, before any legal standing has been found, and essentially saving their own behinds. However, the reality is they're using their power to set an example and no doubt appease their affiliates in certain areas of the world, for better terminology. I find it a diversion and quite hypocritical, given the fact that their own practices are in question at the moment, which I won't get into here. Not that they have been upstanding in my books to begin with. What it amounts to is using power to force the hand on smaller companies by way of obligation. It's an abusive move in my books. That's all I'm going to elaborate on because I have much stronger opinions on Apple, with validity, but I am afraid it will veer the discussion off. I'm just going to leave it at, I don't approve.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » You literally read nothing of what I posted. Lol. It's not about the rates being posted for me. My game goes on tickety-boo. I'll move on from the discussion for now. This is one of those agree to disagree scenarios.
CoquiFongo wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » The implications are that it is a form of Gambling, and it is not. Both legally and literally. What they're doing is creating a precedence by forcing the Apps they provide into a corner, before any legal standing has been found, and essentially saving their own behinds. However, the reality is they're using their power to set an example and no doubt appease their affiliates in certain areas of the world, for better terminology. I find it a diversion and quite hypocritical, given the fact that their own practices are in question at the moment, which I won't get into here. Not that they have been upstanding in my books to begin with. What it amounts to is using power to force the hand on smaller companies by way of obligation. It's an abusive move in my books. That's all I'm going to elaborate on because I have much stronger opinions on Apple, with validity, but I am afraid it will veer the discussion off. I'm just going to leave it at, I don't approve. So you’re whole platform is built on the foundation that loot boxes are NOT gambling, while the rest of the world says they are. This followed by some “mystery”slander to discredit said, already flawed argument, shows your bias against the company and not th issue. Lemme boil this down like a nice tricky tasty sauce; you don’t like Apple, you defend/love Kabam to death, you’re arguments are biased so there for invalid. And you fail to actually explain anything just slide around on the ice of innuendo and secret whispers. But I guess this is moot since you said you’re done so, Bye Felicia.
GroundedWisdom wrote: » Except you have no take home on that wager. You can't withdrawal from your Account. You don't own it. You are renting the license to use their product. There is no payout. Ever. Your Account, everything in it, the game itself, is property of Kabam. It's right there in the TOS. Which is why it's not governed by an Age of Majority as Gambling is. It's not Gambling. No matter how people spin it.
CoquiFongo wrote: » UnsaferBinkie7 wrote: » I told you, didn't even make big statement. Just said some 10 year old come back. Lolololojajajajajajlololol Wagering an item on the outcome of another item.....gambling. I’ve known this since I was tossing dice against the wall in grade school.
UnsaferBinkie7 wrote: » I told you, didn't even make big statement. Just said some 10 year old come back.
UnsaferBinkie7 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » Except you have no take home on that wager. You can't withdrawal from your Account. You don't own it. You are renting the license to use their product. There is no payout. Ever. Your Account, everything in it, the game itself, is property of Kabam. It's right there in the TOS. Which is why it's not governed by an Age of Majority as Gambling is. It's not Gambling. No matter how people spin it. Lmao, I think he's serious.
CoatHang3r wrote: » CoquiFongo wrote: » UnsaferBinkie7 wrote: » I told you, didn't even make big statement. Just said some 10 year old come back. Lolololojajajajajajlololol Wagering an item on the outcome of another item.....gambling. I’ve known this since I was tossing dice against the wall in grade school. UnsaferBinkie7 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » Except you have no take home on that wager. You can't withdrawal from your Account. You don't own it. You are renting the license to use their product. There is no payout. Ever. Your Account, everything in it, the game itself, is property of Kabam. It's right there in the TOS. Which is why it's not governed by an Age of Majority as Gambling is. It's not Gambling. No matter how people spin it. Lmao, I think he's serious. What definition of gambling are you guys using? I am unaware of any legal or for that matter dictionary definition that crystals would fall under.
Stryke71121 wrote: » The better questions are how much will kabam change the odds before disclosing? and how much will they straight out manipulate the odds to make them appear better than they are? As a bonus question how long before google adds the same requirement. second bonus question. will kabam hide the odds from google players?
CoatHang3r wrote: » @UnsaferBinkie7 I am asking you to show me what definition of gambling you are using. It’s not that difficult. I have already stated that I have never seen a definition for gambling that would include crystals in Mcoc. I require the definition you are using because quite simply what you are claiming does not jibe with any definition especially any legal definition I have come across. You obviously have internet access so let’s see it. See simply put, every definition I have come across requires that for gambling to occur you need to put up something of value (hint units have zero value) for a chance at being awarded something of value (hint there is zero value in any item in game refer to the TOS).
CoatHang3r wrote: » See simply put, every definition I have come across requires that for gambling to occur you need to put up something of value (hint units have zero value) for a chance at being awarded something of value (hint there is zero value in any item in game refer to the TOS).
Mmx1991 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » Except you have no take home on that wager. You can't withdrawal from your Account. You don't own it. You are renting the license to use their product. There is no payout. Ever. Your Account, everything in it, the game itself, is property of Kabam. It's right there in the TOS. Which is why it's not governed by an Age of Majority as Gambling is. It's not Gambling. No matter how people spin it. You are RISKING something (units or shards that are on the table to be purchased) FOR something of VALUE. It's gambling.
CoatHang3r wrote: » Mmx1991 wrote: » GroundedWisdom wrote: » Except you have no take home on that wager. You can't withdrawal from your Account. You don't own it. You are renting the license to use their product. There is no payout. Ever. Your Account, everything in it, the game itself, is property of Kabam. It's right there in the TOS. Which is why it's not governed by an Age of Majority as Gambling is. It's not Gambling. No matter how people spin it. You are RISKING something (units or shards that are on the table to be purchased) FOR something of VALUE. It's gambling. 1. Read the tos, the contract you entered into when installing the game. There is zero redeemable value in in game items and all sales after final. You have in essence bought tokens at an arcade that are only redeemable for content within the game. Furthermore all content including your account is owned by Kabam. 2. Being that you own nothing it has zero tangible value. 3. In arguendo, if it did have value you are not at risk of losing as you do receive something in return guaranteed.